Sunday, June 28, 2015

If the U.S. Supreme Court hadn’t issued the ruling it did on Friday, I probably would have taken a different approach in this homily. But they did what they did, so I think it needs to be talked about.First of all, this is a terrible outcome for our country, in more ways than one.The teaching of Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord is crystal-clear. People like to say that Jesus never mentioned this issue, but that’s simply false. Jesus was asked about marriage and divorce, and in Matthew Chapter 19, he said the following:“Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”Now, the Bible says quite a bit more. The Apostles – who Jesus gave both authority and his own power to teach in his name – have reiterated the point. And the Catholic Church has always taught the same things about sex and marriage, namely:That it is one man and one woman, till death do us part—no remarriage after divorce;That sex belongs in marriage—that is, man and woman;And that marriage always includes the intention of bringing children into the world, and therefore, marital life must remain open to the gift of life— and thus, no artificial means of preventing conception.Now, of course, no law says the U.S. government has to listen to the Bible or the Catholic Church. We were not founded on any religious creed. So, to be very clear—I am not saying that the courts, or the legislatures, are obliged to adopt any specific, Catholic teaching.No, in making this point up front, I want to lay down a very clear statement, without any ambiguity, regarding what our Faith teaches us. Lots of Catholics seem not to know these things.This is what Jesus teaches, what the Apostles teach, we believe. These are not options, like whether you get a sunroof on your car.This is what it means to say we are the One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. We are not the Church of what’s popular in 2015. Jesus is our teacher. He is the truth. And nothing any court, or legislature, or politician, or opinion poll, or marketing expert says, makes any difference.I said a moment ago this is bad for our country. How can standing against the King of Kings be anything else?Now, of course, some people are saying—many Catholics are saying—“who cares what the law allows? You just said we don’t expect our government to adopt our religious doctrines as law. So why not allow same-sex marriage? Why not, live-and-let-live?”Let’s talk about that.First, to some degree, we do want a live-and-let-live approach. That’s what almost everyone wants. None of us wants to go into anyone’s home to see who lives there, what their relationship is, and so forth. If people want to say they are married to each other, there’s nothing you or I can do, even if we cared to. What was at issue here was what the society as a whole is being asked to give validation, and approval, to -- a new and fundamentally different understanding of what marriage is. And that is no longer, “live and let live.”Until the Supreme Court gave its ruling, each state was finding its own way. But the majority of the court decided that wasn’t acceptable: everyone had to be forced to accept a new understanding of marriage. Second, while a society can have lots of diversity, a society really isn’t a society unless it has some common foundations. A room full of strangers is not a “society.” They might become one, but only as they discover, or create, values in common. That is the foundation of any cohesive society.Marriage isn’t just a detail. It is at the foundation, because what marriage is, is really about what being human is. Earlier I laid out the basics of what our Catholic Faith holds about marriage. But let’s be clear: what marriage is, isn’t simply a Catholic doctrine.This is very important to grasp.Does anyone seriously think that before the Church existed, marriage wasn’t already man-plus-woman? Do people think Moses invented this idea? If you go to India, where most people are Hindu – or to Saudi Arabia, where it’s almost 100% Muslim – or to southeast Asia, where almost everyone is Buddhist – will they say be surprised to hear of man-woman marriage?Of course not. Every human society, ever, before our earliest memories, has understood marriage is man-plus-woman. Because this isn’t a religious dogma; it’s biology. It’s human experience. What Jesus was telling those people was that this truth was written by God into human nature itself. It’s not for us to rewrite it.Yes, I think it’s very bad for our country to think we can remake human nature. And that’s not just bad for our country; it’s bad for all of us. This decision sets up an inevitable conflict. It’s already been happening even before the High Court imposed a redefinition of marriage on the entire country. It will get worse.Within hours of the decision, a host of big companies were publishing ads, or sending out twitter messages, aligning themselves with this decision. This will continue. People who don’t agree—meaning faithful Christians, in particular, and many of other faiths—will find that they are simply excluded from jobs, from promotions, from professions.Justice Kennedy’s decision equated our refusal to redefine marriage with being a racist. I told you weeks ago this would happen. Read his decision. He puts it in the same category. This is a lie; but when a lie is told often enough, two things happen: lots of people come to believe it; and lots of other people, out of fear or self-protection, stop fighting back.(Now, I had wanted to say something about Pope Francis’ recent encyclical. I still haven’t read it. I will as soon as I can.But there are a couple of points that have been widely quoted. Obviously he had a lot to say about respecting and reverencingthe natural environment. He’s been quoted as saying, if we slap nature, don’t be surprised if nature slaps you back.When it comes to destroying forests, or polluting the water, or not being thoughtful about chemicals we create and use, this is clearly true. Some years ago, we found out that aerosol products were damaging the atmosphere; and if we didn’t stop it, it could have led to terrible consequences. We did stop using those products, and the situation has improved.We’re learning similar lessons about how the human body works. In recent years, we’re discovering just how very complex, and delicate, is the interaction between our own bodies, and various life forms—including bacteria—that live inside us. We didn’t know how delicate the balance was. We’re learning. And we still have a lot more to learn.Well, Pope Francis, in his encyclical, extended that point to respecting the balance and design of the human family. Man, woman, mother, father, children.)*The Court’s decision about marriage didn’t happen in a vacuum. Our society has been redefining marriage and family for most of the last century. We redefined marriage when we allowed no-fault divorce. When we accepted promiscuity as normal. When, as a society, we embraced contraceptives. And when we decided it didn’t matter all that much if a child had both parents in the home. What the Supreme Court did is only the last nail in the coffin to our society’s understanding of what marriage and family are.
Now, I want to say something to the question of what we say to people who have same-sex feelings. What do we say to them?
First, that everyone is God's child; no one is not welcome.
No one is better than anyone else. We are all sinners, begging for God's grace.

Second, it can be a very hard thing to realize you have feelings that others don't, and you can feel very apart. It doesn't help when there are people who bully, and you hear people say some ugly things. It's hard to know who to talk to. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we were the seen as the sort of people someone in that situation would feel free to come and confide in?

Now, when you're feeling very alone with a difficult situation, it is easy to think no one else knows what it's like, and your situation, your trial, is worse than anyone else's. It can happen when you're unemployed; when you have cancer, or when your marriage is breaking up. But when we talk to each other, and support each other, we can find that, while our trial is great, we aren't alone.

I wish I could say there was some easy way to make it all better, but I can't; neither can I do that when someone is facing a terrible illness, or some other crisis. What we do is turn to the Lord, as in the psalm, and ask the Lord to draw close to us.**

The first reading from Wisdom assures us that God’s design for us is about life. We don’t always know this, or believe it. Sometimes we think God’s ways, God’s laws, are just about taking away our choices. Sort of like how you and I responded to our parents’ rules when we were little. And when we ignored their rules, we often found out what it was they were protecting us from.In the years to come, we’re going to find out what God was trying to protect us from. We’re already finding out. We’ve already made a mess of the family. We have a flood of pornography. We have young people growing up who don’t even know how to be adults, often because the adults in their lives also don’t know how.They don’t know how to give themselves sacrificially to each other. All they’ve been given is lies about sex and what it means.And it is going to get worse for awhile. Oh yes, we’re going to find out.In the Gospel, we see a woman who suffered for twelve long years; and we see a father whose child is dead. Both of them had good reason to give up hope; the mourners thought the father was crazy to hope. So what? They didn’t reckon on what Jesus could do!Jesus can do anything. The woman and the man fell to their knees and begged him for help. What will it take for us to fall to our knees, in repentance and humility, and beg for him to save us?* I omitted this part at some Masses, due to time.
** This part was not written down; so I handled it differently at each Mass.

Friday, June 26, 2015

The whole world knows, or will soon enough, that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, today, by a bare 5-4 majority, that the U.S. Constitution compels every state to redefine marriage to include so-called "same-sex marriage."

A lot of folks are saying anodyne things like this from Sen. Lindsey Graham:

I read it, and the dissents, and it is an embarrassing mess. I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but based on this monstrosity, constitutional lawyers are way overrated. I first labeled this ruling "trash," but went back and recast that sentence. Trash denotes a lack of worth, which is what I meant; but trash often is found to have value nonetheless; and if not, is mainly noxious, but otherwise, not all that harmful. This decision will cause terrible harm.

No, I do not respect this ruling. It is completely and utterly undeserving of respect.

Will I obey it? Well, let's see...

-- I can assure you that I will never officiate at any marriage that is not fully in accord with the Catholic Faith. No same-sex marriages from me, anytime.

-- The State of Ohio will now be coerced into recognizing "same sex marriage," and inasmuch as I am a citizen of Ohio, I'm being dragooned into that. Now and always, I withhold my approval to that lie. The State of Ohio, however unwillingly it cooperates with this, does not speak for me.

-- If someone rushes up to tell me that he or she is "married," and points to a spouse of the same sex, I think being polite and friendly is a good policy; but if you press me to find out if I agree, don't be surprised by my candor.

-- And if anyone tries to get me to tip my hat, rhetorically, to the grandeur of the law, or the dignity of the courts, or some such blather, I will try to avoid laughing in your face, but I may fail to restrain myself.

This is, in the words of a Supreme Court justice of an another era, "an exercise of raw judicial power." It will create great mischief. Future generations will be embarrassed by it.

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection. (Emphasis added.)

While it may seem a hidden, or minor, issue for many, there is a growing problem with porn, primarily on the Internet. It especially affects young men. It's discouraging to learn that a large number of boys begin consuming pornography in their early teens.

I am persuaded by the things I read that this isn't only about sexual morality. Consuming porn hobbles an individual's ability to socialize; and it has to have an effect on how men and women enter into healthy intimacy, including sexual intimacy. If you train your mind to seek and be satisfied only by an unreal, unattainable phantom, of course you're going to be disappointed by boring reality.

There are lots of people who get this, and who want to kick the habit. But they find it very hard to do. I've been doing some reading, and hunting around, for resources that might help.

This last one requires some explanation. It's an online forum for mutual support in abstaining from consuming pornography and all that goes with it.

None of these are, that I can see, specifically Catholic or Christian, although there are some spiritual elements here and there. I mention this so that people realize the limitations in what I'm offering. And, if anyone finds anything problematic in these sites, please let me know.

The NoFap forum looks especially promising, precisely because what makes it hard to overcome these habits is the sense of isolation. Who do you talk to about it? What holds you accountable?

If you're reading this, and this is a problem you face, don't give up hope. I'm praying for you (and I'm not the only one).

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

I got back to the parish yesterday, but today is my first day "back to work." I had planned to be away today, but -- as I often do -- I decided to come back a day early. Partly because I have a meeting tonight for which I need to prepare, and partly because I was ready to get back at it. (Actually, I got back to it a bit yesterday, but don't tell anyone.)

Because I'd planned to be away today, I'd arranged for a retired priest to take the morning Mass; so I left that in place. As it happens, the priest from the neighboring parish, who was scheduled to do the Mass at the nursing home today, called me yesterday to see if I would do it; and I was happy to do so. So I did get to sleep in today. After breakfast, and checking some emails, I walked over to the school, where the children of the parish are gathered this week for "Bible Camp." As I walked in, one group was working on some arts-and-crafts project; they were bristling with comments:

"Father, you're back!"

"Why weren't you at Mass today?"

"Mass has been really quick lately!"

"The priest who filled in while you were gone creeped me out!" (It had nothing to do with his fidelity, I was happy to discover; but I'm not sure what the problem was.)

"Where did you go on your vacation?"

The crafts project involved creating a mini-"bible," in which they pasted Scripture verses regarding Abraham, David and Eliakim, all Old Testament figures who foreshadowed Peter, the first pope. "Upon this rock" is the theme, and lots of activities serve to reinforce this.

In the gym, another group was playing "Glow in the Dark Dodgeball." Someone explained the connection to Saint Peter, but I can't recall it now. And if you're wondering how you have glow-in-the-dark dodgeball, it involves flexible "glowsticks," which have some sort of radiant liquid in them.

Then, a third group was meeting for lesson-time, in which the Bible lesson was explained. I told the children about visiting Caesarea Philippi, the place where our Savior told Peter, "You are Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church." The city of Caesarea Philippi was situated at the base of a really big rock--i.e., a mountain; at the foot of the mountain were a collection of pagan temples, which were very active when Jesus brought the Apostles there. The point being that Peter (and the Apostles) would be instrumental in building his Church, to replace the error of paganism. And, indeed, today, the pagan shrines are all in ruins.

Well, all that was before noon. After visiting with the children awhile, I came back over here and fiddled some more at the computer (that includes writing this post) while I answered the phones -- the staff is all at Bible Camp. The funny thing is, no one wanted to talk to me! They were all calling about the bulletin, or scheduling a Mass, etc. In a few minutes I'll head over to the nursing home. Then I'll stop at the store for some supplies for the meeting tonight.

Friday, June 19, 2015

Sorry for no posts while I have been traveling, but all I had on the road was my iPad, and I find it very clumsy for posting to my blog. I'm back-but-not-back; I have a wedding tomorrow, in Russia, hence a rehearsal tonight. After the wedding, I'm back on the road for a couple of days.

No, I haven't read the Holy Father's new encyclical. I'll get to it when I get back. I have no comment, other than to say everyone should relax. If you think this is the most important thing evah! get a grip; if you think the pope has done something terrible, because it's part of an encyclical after all, likewise, get a grip. When the pope teaches, that's important; and if you think the pope didn't get it quite right? Well, this wasn't a dogmatic definition (hence, infallible), so just relax. That's what I'm doing.

Tuesday, June 09, 2015

So, in Delaware, is it "shore," like New Jersey, or "beach," or "coast" -- or something else? Anyway, that's where I am, as the sun goes down and it cools off a bit.

Why Delaware? Well, I've never been to these beaches, and it's actually the straightest shot from Ohio. (A fellow looking like Mitt Romney just putt-putted by on a moped. Do you really think it was.... Nah...) It's a funny thing, my coming to the beach. I can't take the sun, so I'll be troweling on sunscreen tomorrow; but I like looking at, and listening to, the ocean.

So, here's my trip so far. Sunday, after three Masses and our Corpus Christi procession (which was outstanding, the best I've ever been part of), I hit the road around 2 pm., heading for Washington, PA. Yesterday, I went from there to Emmitsburg, where I visited the shrine of Mother Seton, then I drove to my cousin's house outside Baltimore. We had a great time, as always. From there to the beach today. I had several messages from home, about things I forgot to explain, but all seems well. I do miss the parish! I'm praying for you every day.

Sunday, June 07, 2015

This feast of the Body and Blood of Christ is obviously a wonderful time to focus on the gift of the Eucharist. Last Friday, I visited several home-bound parishioners as I always do on the First Friday of the month. And I talked to them about how special the gift of the Eucharist is. Our fellow Christians, who don’t believe in the Eucharist, still believe Jesus is present with us; but for them, it’s an abstract presence: he’s here, somewhere. But with the Eucharist, we know exactly where Jesus is! It’s concrete and tangible. We can see, touch and taste the Eucharist. The Eucharist isn’t the only way Jesus is with us; but what a wonderful anchor this is for our faith!So one value to this feast is to help us avoid taking this gift of Jesus’ Body and Blood for granted. When someone grows up in a well-to-do family with lots of advantages, there’s always a danger of not realizing how different life is without all those advantages. And the same is true for us as Catholics. We have such riches in our Faith, in the saints, in our many ways to pray, in the teaching office held by the pope and the bishops, in the sacraments, and above all, in the real, true presence of Jesus in the Mass and the Eucharist!I thought this might be a good time to review some of the things that help maintain the prayerfulness at Mass; sort of like the father in the well-to-do family who wants to make sure his children understand the advantages they have:Let me start with our church. If you visit other Catholic churches, you’ll find some odd designs; and many that have been whitewashed inside, the statues were taken away, or the stained glass is just abstract designs. This was the trend for a while, but that tide is receding. People meant well, but it was just a mistake to take away all the art. No, we don’t “need” images of Mary and Joseph and the saints in order to believe or to pray. But they sure help, don’t they? Especially with children.But what does the most to make this church prayerful is you. Your silence, your desire for reverence, makes all the difference. When we have weddings, we often have folks visit who act no differently in church from how they act with friends in their living room, talking and visiting. Nothing is bad about that; but it destroys reverence.Similarly, I know that you pay attention to how you dress in church. It’s not a matter of wearing fancy clothes, but of taking care, and not being a distraction. When it comes to shorts, shirts without sleeves, and so forth, I don’t really want to decide how short is too short. But if I showed up in my shorts, you’d be distracted! I am so grateful especially for our ushers and readers and extraordinary ministers of holy communion who take extra care.This is a good time to talk about how we receive holy communion. You know that there are two options: receiving on the tongue, or in the hand. What you may not know is that receiving on the tongue is the norm in the whole world, outside the U.S. It was in this country that a special permission was given to receive the Body of Christ in the hand—but that permission comes with some expectations. First, that someone has both hands free. So, for example, sometimes someone will come for communion, and will be using one hand to hold a child, or to lean on a cane. In those cases, if they put out one hand, I’ll whisper, “I’ll put it on your tongue.” And the reason is that it’s a little dicey managing with one hand, and should we really be juggling with the Eucharist?The other expectation was that in receiving communion with our hands, we wouldn’t lessen our reverence for the Body of Christ. It’s harder to be casual when you receive on the tongue. So to those who wish to receive the Eucharist in the hand, how about lifting your hands up high? Make your hand a throne. If you were given the privilege of carrying something of immense value – of gold and precious stones – would you swing it around in one hand, or use both? And would you have it down here, like a box of stuff from the attic? Or would you lift your hands up high? I might also point out that this is practical, especially when the person receiving communion is shorter, and the person giving communion is taller. Speaking as one of those tall people, lifting your hands up high really helps. And also, it makes it less likely you’ll drop the host before putting it in your mouth.(At all the Masses, I inserted here something about checking your hands, if you receive in the hand, for any particles of the Holy Eucharist.)Now, let me say something to those who follow the traditional practice of receiving on the tongue – which, I confess, I think is very valuable and meaningful. I don’t know how to say this without making you laugh, but—you really have to do two things to make this work: first, you have to open your mouth. Some of you think you do, but you don’t! And you have to stick out your tongue. This is the only time that’s not rude to do.This next item applies to many of our younger parishioners: when you come to communion, however you receive it, you have to stop. Be stationary. Parents, you know what I mean. And I know, parents, you have a lot to manage, but I’d be very grateful if you can help your children remember these things, especially in lifting up their hands and standing still.One of the things that changed in my lifetime was the switch from kneeling at a communion rail, to coming up in a line, standing. I don’t think that was a good change and I’d be happy to see the older way come back. When that change happened, the bishops said that if we didn’t kneel, we are to make some sign of reverence. Most bow their heads, some make the sign of the cross. This is how we acknowledge the Lord in the Eucharist we are about to receive.Earlier I described a child whose family is well off, and has so much. That really is us. Lately our thoughts and prayers have been drawn to the plight of Christians in Africa and the Middle East, whose churches are being burned, and they are fleeing for their lives. Realize what that means: they lose a place where the Eucharist is present for them to visit; and they lose the Mass. What a price they are paying for their faith! Of all the times any of us would want to be able to come and kneel before Jesus in the tabernacle, and pour out our hearts; or to come and eat his Body and drink his Precious Blood – and they can’t do that!So we have a lot to be grateful for. As we have our Mass today – as we lift up Jesus as our king in the streets of our community – we say thank you! Thank you, Jesus, for this incredible gift!

Wednesday, June 03, 2015

I've been wanting to try my hand at meatballs for some time. Yesterday was the day. I'd been collecting various recipes, and decided this one by Martha Stewart would be worth trying. I didn't use her sauce recipe; instead, I used the Neapolitan Ragu recipe that I've had success with twice now.

First I had to get a few ingredients needed. One was ground veal, which I thought about omitting; but then I'd never know if I'd like it better with. Thankfully, the Krogers in Sidney had some, so I ran over there for that, and some fresh basil and a few other items.

(By the way--sorry for no photos, but my iPad's battery was dead yesterday.)

There were a few things to chop: some bread, which I cut up by hand, as well as some parsley. When I realized the big pile of parsley I tediously chopped was only half what I needed, I remembered the food processor I'd gotten a few weeks ago, and decided to see what it would do with parsley. Why, you may wonder, am I gun-shy with the food processor? A food processor can be handy, but you have to know how to use it right, and that takes some experimentation. This project was already going to be a big mess; and if the processor makes mud of the parsley, now I have an even bigger mess.

The parsley came out fine, Deo gratias, but the onion came out a little uneven; some pieces too roughly cut, others pulverized. The processor didn't like the cheese at all; but when I chopped the cheese down to smaller pieces, it worked better. Unfortunately, I didn't buy enough Parmigiano-Reggiano, so I quickly rummaged in my fridge and found some more cheese, which I think was Pecorino Romano. Who's to know? I had just enough then, with nothing to put on top afterward.

Because I decided to double the quantities, the result was a really huge bowl of wet bits of bread, three kinds of ground meat, three kinds of cheese, and all the other stuff. All of which I now had to knead and mix. I tried, at first, to do it with a bag on my hand, but that didn't work, so I had no choice but to do it with my hands. I'm not squeamish; I just wanted to avoid adding germs.

Ms. Stewart called for giant meatballs, but as I was planning to put these into the sauce, I wanted them to be manageable. So I made them more or less standard size. These I put on a baking sheet and a baking pan, and threw in the oven for about 15 minutes. And -- since I'd doubled the quantities, I still had a fair amount of meat-mixture left over. So, decision-time: do I wait and cook them all in the oven? Or, what about browning the rest in a fry pan? I opted for the latter.

After all, the meatballs didn't need to be completely finished, as they would finish in the sauce. So I poured some olive oil into the fry pan and browned the rest in batches. I did brown some a bit too much -- I was off doing some prep for the sauce -- but oh well.

Then, when I had all my finished meatballs -- both those in the oven and those cooked on top -- I realized I had way more than I needed for the sauce, which was also going to get some Italian sausage, which I'd also browned (that turned out nicely). So I decided to put some of the meatballs into the pan for the sauce, and the rest (after finishing in the oven those that I'd only browned) I put in the freezer for later.

At this point, I simply made the same sauce I've made twice before. The only difference, this time, was that I had some fresh basil. I put all the ingredients in -- the tomatoes, which I crushed by hand, along with some wine as well as the onion, carrot and celery I sauteed, along with the garlic and aforementioned basil -- and all that simmered for several hours. Around 8 pm, after a meeting, I had some of the sauce over some pasta.

Verdict?

The sauce was good, but needs some more time simmering. And a little salt.

The Italian sausage, made by Krogers, was better than the last, but still not seasoned enough for me. I'm going to have to do some more work on this one.

The meatballs? Very good! I'd actually eaten a couple right out of the oven. More oregano would have been good, and maybe a little red pepper.

I've got plenty left over, and I plan to simmer it some more ahead of tomorrow's dinner.

About Me

I am the parish priest at Saint Remy Parish in Russia, Ohio, in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati.
What appear to be my opinions expressed herein are, in fact, my opinions, no one else's. Those in the comments belong to the commenters.